I remember a Rebel piece on a Lesbian couple who were denied service...? that I rather enjoyed. It was both funny and to the point.
Anytime someone - whether individual or organization - finds it necessary to take extreme measures to prevent others from merely voicing their opinion, I personally find that fishy. Why not present their counter-arguments instead of breaking stuff and/or intimidating store owners, for example...? ...
It’s ironic that the founding fathers are mentioned on a poster for an event aiming to override election results. At least the need for security is being taken seriously this time around. The question is, will it be enough?
I remember a Rebel piece on a Lesbian couple who were denied service...? that I rather enjoyed. It was both funny and to the point.
Anytime someone - whether individual or organization - finds it necessary to take extreme measures to prevent others from merely voicing their opinion, I personally find that fishy. Why not present their counter-arguments instead of breaking stuff and/or intimidating store owners, for example...? ...
It’s ironic that the founding fathers are mentioned on a poster for an event aiming to override election results. At least the need for security is being taken seriously this time around. The question is, will it be enough?